TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 463
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....offence punishable under section 132 (1)(a), (f) (h) and (l) of the Act of 2017 was registered. The gist of the complaint is as under:- विभाग को सूचना मिली कि कुछ लोग राजस्थान के मण्डी में मार्बल, ग्रेनाइट, सैण्ड स्टोन, कोटा स्टोन की सप्लाई के लिए फर्जी फर्मो से बिल और ई-वे बिल जारी करने का कार्य कर रहे हैं, जिसमें मनोज जí....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#2348;ालाजी मार्बल है। ऑर्डर आने पर माल की खरीद बिना जीएसटी बिल के कैश में करता, उसके उपरान्त अभियुक्त इस माल का बिल किसी भी फर्जी फर्म मैसर्स ग्लोबल मार्बल एण्ड ग्रेनाइट, मैसर्स निखिल मार्बल, मैसर्स ग्रेनाइट वर....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....52;्मो का प्रयोग अभियुक्त अपने मित्र मनोज के साथ मिलकर फर्जी बिल इनवॉइस जारी करने का कार्य करते हैं। इन फर्मों को मनोज द्वारा ऑपरेट किया जाना और इसकी एवज में मिले कमीशन को आपस में 2:1 अनुपात में बंटवारा करना बताë....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2357;ं सेवाकर अधिनियम, 2017 की धारा 132(1)(ए)(एफ)(एच)(एल) का दण्डनीय अपराध किया गया है। 3. Counsel appearing for the accused petitioner submitted that the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused petitioner is triable by First Class Magistrate and the maximum punishment is 5 years. Counsel also submitted that the offences in regard to evasion of tax upto Rs.5 crores is bailable and the person against whom there are allegations of creating fake firms has not been arrested so far and the investigation has been kept pending against him. In such circumstances, keeping the accused petitioner in custody for an indefinite period is unjustified. Counsel also submitted that the actual culprit in this case has been saved by the complainant-Union of India. Counsel also submitted that the accused petitioner has been made as an accused only on the basis of his won statement record....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g. The fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody sine 14.01.2022, makes it clear that the petitioner's custodial interrogation is no longer required. Counsel further submitted that the entire evidence in the present case is based on documents. As such, there arises no question of tampering with evidence or influencing any witnesses. Even otherwise, the petitioner undertakes not to tamper with any evidence or influence any witness and further undertakes to join investigation as and when directed. Therefore, as per the dictum of the Delhi High Court latest in the case of P. Chidambaram (supra), the accused petitioner deserves to be released on bail in as much as, neither he is a flight risk, nor there is apprehension that he will tamper with evidence. Counsel further submitted that no further recovery is to be made from the possession of the accused petitioner. Counsel also submitted that the investigation of the case is likely to take long time and trial is also likely to take considerable time. Counsel further submitted that the conditions precedent to order arrest are not satisfied, as the satisfaction of the Commissioner with regard to having reasons to believe that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tted that from the business premises of the petitioner, the evidence in regard to his mobile phone, rubber stamp seal of M/s. A2Z Granite & Marble & M/s. Balaji Marble and Granite, Blank bilty book, note-book containing details related to marble and granite sales, loose estimate slips related to marble and granite sales, made up file containing e-way bills of fake firms M/s. Krishna Marble Traders and M/s. Rameshwaram Stonex, Printouts of Screenshots of Whatsapp Chatts etc., have been recovered. He further submitted that on the basis of above evidences, nine firms have been operated by the petitioner. He further submitted that out of nine firms, seven have no inward supply and in the remaining two firms, the inward supply is negligible in comparison to the outward supply and these firms have not been found in existence on their registered premises, which proves that all these firms are bogus and have been created only for giving transportation a genuine color which ultimately resulted in GST evasion of Rs.20,81,31,977/-. He further submitted that the same was caused by the petitioner through the fake firms operated by him by issuing fake bills/ e-way bills. The aforesaid facts are....